UK Amazon Kindle Forum discussion
General Chat - anything Goes
>
The 'Take it Outside' thread This thread will no longer be moderated ***
Jim wrote: "In Scotland 2016 is going to be interesting. I think that with the Westminster elections, the SNP benefited from the same sort of bonus that UKIP get in Euro elections. People don't take them serio..."I can save you a lot of time and effort by giving you the result right now: another SNP majority.
Sturgeon is riding the crest of a wave right now, and although it will fall at some point, it'll easily sweep her and the SNP to another victory.
The SNP have more money than their rivals, a pretty slick campaign machine and most crucially IMO they have thousands of volunteers to knock on doors, hand out leaflets, organise meetings etc etc
When it comes to the bread and butter aspect of an election campaign, the SNP are miles ahead.
Labour in contrast, are in complete disarray. No cash, membership of around 9000 (SNP membership is around 100,000) and will be forced to bus in volunteers from down south, which is never a popular move for any party up here.
R.M.F wrote: "I can save you a lot of time and effort by giving you the result right now: another SNP majority. ..."
Do they have a majority in the Scots parliament? With 64 seats out of 128
Jim wrote: "R.M.F wrote: "I can save you a lot of time and effort by giving you the result right now: another SNP majority. ..."
Do they have a majority in the Scots parliament? With 64 seats out of 128"
That was the maths that lost them the referendum.
Geoff (G. Robbins) (The noisy passionfruit) wrote: "Interesting analysis:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/polit..."
That is one of the worst pieces I've ever seen in the telegraph. It takes things Corbyn has never said (like leaving Nato), exagerates others (eg: 'There will be circumstances in which I would send our young men to fight abroad - I just can't see them at the moment' into I've NEVER use the military) and then knocks over straw men.
Playing to a gallery, not analysis.
All that and Diane Abott!
Jim wrote: "R.M.F wrote: "I can save you a lot of time and effort by giving you the result right now: another SNP majority. ..."
Do they have a majority in the Scots parliament? With 64 seats out of 128 (129 seats in total when you discount the lord advocate and solicitor general)"
The presiding officer (who is SNP) doesn't vote, so that's 64 out of 128. Plus the rest of the seats are divided between the Greens (pro-independence) and the usual rabble of Labour, Tories, and fib dems, who can't agree on anything except the SNP are bad.
Geoff (G. Robbins) (The noisy passionfruit) wrote: "Interesting analysis:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/polit..."
Journalism at the Telegraph? They gave up on that a long time ago.
What do you expect when most our the British press has a political agenda, that's why I have never taken a newspaper. But sometimes you do get some proper reporting, some decent investigative journalism, usually from foreign correspondents in war zones.
Marc wrote: "What do you expect when most our the British press has a political agenda, that's why I have never taken a newspaper. But sometimes you do get some proper reporting, some decent investigative journ..."I don't like agreeing with you, but I'll have to on this occasion :)
Newspapers, especially UK newspapers, always seem to make the mistake of conflating their opinion with public opinion. And it's getting worse and worse with each passing year.
The Mirror is no better than the Sun, The Guardian no better than the Torygraph and Mail
Expect more demands from the papers for attacks on Syria:A company part owned by Mr Murdock has received oil drilling permissions on the Israili/Syrian border...
And the Conservatives invite draconian and abusive governments to the UK. To buy more weapons and equipment to use on their own people.http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015...
What about the QPI?. The Qataris hold about 70% of shares in the LNG plant at South Hook. 2004 was the start of that project, remember who was Prime Minister at the time, Will? They are all at it. They'd all sell their grandmothers if they thought the trough was a little depleted. We were also exporting oil pipes which were exactly the dimensions of Saddams scud guns so I don't think pointing fingers at any one party works
I was darkly amused that 'countries using child soldiers are invited'.In the eyes of the world the UK uses child soldiers......
Will wrote: "And the Conservatives invite draconian and abusive governments to the UK. To buy more weapons and equipment to use on their own people.http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015......"
You really can't win. Stop the sales of arms and thousands lose their jobs. Then blame the Tories for high unemployment. you can't have it both ways, Will. You want employment or sainthood? You can't have both.
We're no longer cock of the walk in that game, it looks as if Israel will soon overtake ushttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_in...
At the moment we're lying sixth
Looking at the importers then there may be an irony in that India is number 2 and we're probably one of their larger suppliers, but we give them a lot of aid so they can afford it
Looking at the companies doing the supplying, BAE is up there at number 3 but mainly because the stuff it supplies is so expensive. When you look most are companies supplying aircraft.
If you want the companies that supply the weaponry that ends up in the massacres and similar, here is a list of Military armament manufacturers
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...
Remember that just like with chemical weapons, the production of automatic weapons is merely the application of late 19th century technology.
Some of this is, ironically, because of arms embargoes in the past. Israel has been repeatedly put under pressure by countries threatening to supply or not supply them with arms. The same is true of South Africa, Brazil, and a number of other placed. All that has happened is that they have developed indigenous arms industries to keep their own armed forces supplied. Then having the plant and the contacts they've shifted to exports to help defray the cost and keep unit prices down.
I've been watching the attempts by Jeremy Corbyn to put together his shadow cabinet and it strikes me that we are seeing, displayed rather starkly, the legitimate tensions that can arise within a democratic system.He has been elected by his electorate. He got a pretty solid mandate for his opinions.
But other Labour MPs have also been elected by their electorates.
So in the case of our MP he was very 'pro-trident'.
It also strikes me that neither electorate 'trumps' the other.
So sitting back and watching the negotiating, horse-trading and suchlike that's going on, I don't have a problem with it. I think that it's just more noticeable time because the gap between the negotiators is wider than usual.
Geoff (G. Robbins) (The noisy passionfruit) wrote: "Will wrote: "And the Conservatives invite draconian and abusive governments to the UK. To buy more weapons and equipment to use on their own people.http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015......"
I'd rather the people in those industries were deployed in other areas of manufacturing, Geoff. The skills are transportable to make other things, you know, as is almost all of the plant.
The afghans are a perfect example of the damage even 'outdated' weaponry can wreak. They are excellent marksmen with antiquated rifles.
The problem that I have with running a large arms industry, is that we end up encouraging people to actually use the damn things in earnest. So that we can sell them more of the same.Picking up Jim's child soldiers point, I rather agree. I find it disturbing that we have had young people in combat situations before we consider them old enough to be responsible enough to vote. I have many, many doubts about that
Donald Rumsfeld being an example.
Ideologically citizenship and the duty to bear arms went together. If somebody wasn't able to bear arms then they weren't entitled to be a citizen. (Illness and increasing age obviously weren't a bar. Being female was.)The idea was that only those who would have to face the consequences of their voting should be allowed to vote. So those who would actually have to do the fighting would be those who voted on whether it was peace or war.
With us this broke down and the Wars of the Roses was probably the last war when those who aspired to run the country had to be prepared to die, sword in hand, as part of their job.
Now we have a strange situation. We have to an extent infantalised our young people. In my youth, in this town, most lads would be wage earners at fifteen and sixteen and on 'proper money' (admittedly military shipbuilding) by the time they finished their apprenticeship. Most men were married by 23/24, most girls by the time they were 19/20. One reason why you asked a father for his daughter's hand in marriage was because she wasn't legally adult herself!
I remember somebody commenting recently that there was a hushed discussion as to whether a young member of the congregation should be asked to do the collection. Somebody rather dryly commented that the government trusted him to fly an umpteen million pound aeroplane, so surely they could trust him with the forty quid in the plate.
It might be that the army is the last institution that isn't infantalising our young people.
But yes, it is as you say somewhat disturbing
As I've said before, young people pay tax, but can't vote. No taxation without representation.
Scottish Parliament will be lowering the age for voting in the next few years, so that's a step forward.
what let a load of Neds vote up there?
Marc wrote: "what let a load of Neds vote up there?"Idiots have the same right to vote as everybody else. I'm led to believe that Parliament is full of idiots.
Will wrote: "I'd rather the people in those industries were deployed in other areas of manufacturing, Geoff. The skills are transportable to make other things, you know, as is almost all of the plant."Tell that to the mineworkers, the weavers, etc, etc. They got displaced and never worked again. Skills are transportable, history tells us that people aren't.
Jim, I see what you are saying about 'infantalising', but I see this as part of on ongoing process.we now live longer. When the lads were earning in the shipyards at 15, they were probably about 25% of the way through their whole life expectancy.
Go back further, and girls were married at 12 or 14, and lads were earning at that age - as life expectancy was lower.
Now, unless you are poor http://www.theguardian.com/society/20...
in Cameron's Britain. Life expectancy is much longer, now, thanks to medical advances. So why shouldn't young people enjoy a longer childhood before they join a shrinking jobs market? A jobs market that, politics aside now, will continue to shrink as automation grows over the next decade or two. That's a challenge for all parties to address.
we need full automation in order to move to a post-work, leisure economy :-)
Geoff (G. Robbins) (The noisy passionfruit) wrote: "Will wrote: "I'd rather the people in those industries were deployed in other areas of manufacturing, Geoff. The skills are transportable to make other things, you know, as is almost all of the pla..."The results of a capitalist system Geoff. People are disposables, and are treated as such. Hence wages are driven down in search of ever higher profits for a few.
Shortly now, Osborne's Tax Credit reductions will start to bite those classed as 'hard working families'. Will that start to change their perceptions of a Tory Government?
Does anyone seriously believe that as Tax Credits are withdrawn, companies like Tesco, JD Sports, G4S and the like will pay their staff any better? Renaming the Minimum wage the Living wage is a clever political ploy, but when the reality arrives, what will people start to think then?
Will wrote: "The results of a capitalist system Geoff. People are disposables, and are treated as such. Hence wages are driven down in search of ever higher profits for a few."With all respect Will, quoting Socialist dogma doesn't make my point any less valid or relevant. The question that I put to you is equally valid.
Would you impose your ethical belief on working people and force them into long time unemployment? Then what happens to your belief that only the capitalists cause unemployment?
Will wrote: "Does anyone seriously believe that as Tax Credits are withdrawn, companies like Tesco, JD Sports, G4S and the like will pay their staff any better? Renaming the Minimum wage the Living wage is a clever political ploy, but when the reality arrives, what will people start to think then? "So, you agree that subsiding large international companies so that they can drive down wages is an acceptable use of our taxes?
It's not Socialist dogma Geoff, it's called economic theory.I would indeed support a withdrawal from widespread international arms dealing and a redeployment of the factories to something more useful to our society. Done as a phased managed change, why should this cause large scale unemployment? Are you personally happy with our country having employment created from the production of artifacts whose only purpose is death, destruction and the infliction of pain, misery and suffering?
No, I don't believe that supporting international companies with taxation monies is a responsible use of those funds: the fact the system to support the lowest paid has developed in this way shows how easily any system can be subverted, doesn't it?
My point is that instead of reducing the Tax Credit Expenditure by first driving up wages to a Living wage Level and thereby taking people out of qualification for payments, Osborne has chosen to first reduce (and in many cases stop entirely) the benefit payments in a vague aspiration that wages will rise as a result. I do not believe this will happen, and that instead poverty will rise - and the most affected by this will be the large numbers of swing voters who misguidedly voted Tory in the hope that some benefit from an improving economy would trickle down to them. How will they feel now?
R.M.F wrote: "As I've said before, young people pay tax, but can't vote. No taxation without representation.
Scottish Parliament will be lowering the age for voting in the next few years, so that's a step fo..."
given that they pay tax the minute they start spending money, this is an argument for five year olds voting :-)
Never forget that it is governments that abuse people, not ideologies.I remember Solzhenitsyn commenting that Stalin threw 100,000 men across a river in a counter attack purely for a good press release on an important day in the Party Calendar. Of those men, perhaps ten percent lived (what with those who died in the fighting, those who survived the fighting to die in German camps, those who survived the German camps to die in the Gulags, and those who survived the battle by fleeing and then survived the commissars.
No capitalists involved in the whole process, just governments who regard people as expendable.
Jim wrote: "R.M.F wrote: "As I've said before, young people pay tax, but can't vote. No taxation without representation.
Scottish Parliament will be lowering the age for voting in the next few years, so th..."
VAT is another nonsense that needs to find a new home in the bin.
Geoff (G. Robbins) (The noisy passionfruit) wrote: "So, you agree that subsiding large international companies so that they can drive down wages is an acceptable use of our taxes?.."It's an interesting discussion. After all we used to subsidise nationalised railways so that fares were low. So we take tax money of poor people and give cheap fares to the rich commuter
Given that with subsidised companies the profits go to shareholders, some of which are pension funds and insurance companies, then the 'redistributive effect' is probably similar in both cases
Social engineering is a far less exact science than mechanical or civil engineering but the long term effects of error are equally profound
Anyway, what's the deal with this trade union bill?The Tories, elected on 25% of the vote, want unions to have a minimum turnout of 40% and a majority in favour of strike action.
If we apply that logic to the Tories, they'd never be in power again.
And getting people on strike to wear armbands?
What is this, the 1930s?
In fairness, even some Tories (David Davies for example - you a fan of his, Geoff? I always listen to him with respect, because even when I disagree with him he bases his views on sound argument and logic) have described sections of the bill as Franco esque and undemocratic.Why should anyone have to give their names to the Police before striking or protesting? Why should they have to give the Police advance notice of a Social Media campaign on a issue?
I thought official pickets had to wear an armband anyway
Will wrote: "In fairness, even some Tories (David Davies for example - you a fan of his, Geoff? I always listen to him with respect, because even when I disagree with him he bases his views on sound argument and d logic) have described sections of the bill as Franco esque and undemocratic.Why should anyone have to give their names to the Police before striking or protesting? Why should they have to give the Police advance notice of a Social Media campaign on a issue? "
Why should you have to notify the police before protesting within one mile of the palace of Westminster? Absurd lawmaking to get rid of one person in a tent, who then got an injunction as it could not be applied retroactively.
If you want to see how absurd, get Mark Thomas' Seriously Organised Criminal on DVD, you'll see how stupid it is.
No Will, I'm not a fan of David Davis, as I'm not a fan of any politician. However, I do appreciate his comments, as I do that of Dennis Skinner. In fact, the latter more than the former.
I have very little sympathy for the trade unions, Will, having lived through the chaos they caused during the seventies and early eighties. It was the trade unions believing that they could rule the roost that caused so many of us to vote for Margaret Thatcher. Up until then I was a Labour voter from a working class family. Labour continue to disinterest me as I trust them even less than I trust the Conservatives.
Unfortunately, the political party that I am a member of does not have a local candidate.
The Mark Thomas stuff is superb. Highly recommended.
I think that the problem is that governments will rather create law than apply the law that is there.We have had during some disputes managers and their families being attacked and harassed.
So unions have been harassing company employees.
Now if this was just brought through the courts as harassment it would soon be brought under control, but it's too much trouble for the authorities to do this, so some bright spark decides we need a new law to control what people say on facebook
Yes, like that is going to work.
So let's just apply the law we've got and prove it does or doesn't work before we invent more
Sometimes as well it is the:Something must be done.
'X' is something.
We must do 'X'.
syndrome. Action without thought.
Absolutely.I can remember one radio 4 programme where a high court judge was bemoaning the fact that the first part of a new law that had come on the statute book said, to paraphrase, 'this isn't meant to be applied, we passed it to send a signal'
The Blair years were apparently quite fruitful for that sort of thing.
Blair was an idiot. The reason I left the Party. (now rejoining, as are thousands of others).See some news clips from today: we appear to have an Opposition Party again. How nice.
Will wrote: "Blair was an idiot. The reason I left the Party. (now rejoining, as are thousands of others).See some news clips from today: we appear to have an Opposition Party again. How nice."
You already had one - it was the SNP :)
Still, let's hope that Labour will turn up and vote against Conservative bills this time.
Nice one, Matt.Mind you, G S T Queen it isn't my National anthem any more. And I bet the Scots just love singing the second verse. Not. (I bet JC would have been happy with the proposed english National Anthem of Jerusalem though, don't you?)
Where's the criticism on how divisive that dreadful song is?
UK Amazon Kindle Forum
Books mentioned in this topic
The Beiderbecke Affair (other topics)The Grain Market in the Roman Empire: A Social, Political and Economic Study (other topics)
The Peasants Are Revolting (other topics)
How to Lie with Statistics (other topics)
That Old Ace in the Hole (other topics)
More...
But in 2016 the elections in Scotland matter to the Scots. I'm quite looking forward to them to be honest.